Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sharron Storer (2nd nomination)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   Nom withdrawn, merged and re-directed per growing consensus. Merge has been done, leave formatting issues to those more familiar with election articles. TCari My travels 14:06, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Sharron Storer
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

There are news stories covering Storer's confrontation of Tony Blair but this appears to be a clear case of BLP1E. She doesn't seem notable for anything else, which the article acknoweledges, and her actions don't seem to have brought about any drastic changes in the British healthcare system. See also WP:NOTNEWS. TCari My travels 20:15, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Delete (with a caveat) I agree with this deletion proposal. At the time the article was created, BLP1E didn't exist (in fact, I'm not even sure BLP did!). Now that consensus has been established that individual "people in the news" for one-off events don't deserve articles of their own, let's not keep this article. The only question is whether the content of this article belongs as a small item in another article - United Kingdom general election, 2001 would seem like an obvious place. SP-KP (talk) 20:26, 15 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete but share SP-KP's view that it could form part of a larger article. BFG1701 (talk) 20:34, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment was it big enough to be included in the article on the general election? It seems from the news coverage that it may well have been, and I can see it as a viable search term. I'm not sure where it would fit best in the context of that article as I admit, I know little to nothing re: British politics and elections, but I would not disagree with a merge if those more familiar think it would "fit" with the article. TCari My travels 20:43, 15 July 2008 (UTC)


 * The 2001 election article is structured a bit unconventionally at the moment - it has a very long lead, followed by sections which just contain data tables or links. A restructuring of the article would help us to find a more natural place for the material here to sit. Potential section headings are: Lead-up to the campaign, The campaign itself, Results, Impact of the election. SP-KP (talk) 21:19, 15 July 2008 (UTC)


 * That makes sense and I would agree with it. I'd leave that to someone more knowledgeable on the election to do but would agree with a merge and redirect. If not for the 'keep' below, I'd close this and do it myself but am now willing to leave it open. TCari My travels 13:03, 16 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep and rename to something appropriate to the incident involved. BLP1E is not a deletion criteria, and specifically says "cover the event, not the person" in regard to this type of article. This article needs to be rewritten, but deletion is not justified until meeting the requirements of BLP1E have at least been attempted. Jim Miller (talk) 22:33, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I think the question is whether the event is encyclopedically notable. It was in the news, yes, but that doesn't provide notability becaise, as I said, there was no change to healthcare regs as a result and this is the only thing she is known for. It can easily be covered in the article on the election. TCari My travels 13:03, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect is fine with me. Meets the spirit of BLP1E, and I agree with the consensus to retain the info somewhere. Jim Miller (talk) 13:11, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  00:05, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete redirect - not notable. Vanity at best. The story is forgettable. Kingturtle (talk) 05:47, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I disagree that this is vanity or forgettable. It was one of the major stories of the 2001 election, and I for one remember it clearly seven years later. Nonetheless, given BLP1E, I think we should merge into United Kingdom general election, 2001, and make this article into a redirect. Stephen Turner (Talk) 06:27, 16 July 2008 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.